St. Genevieve Gas Company, Inc., a Corporation v. Tennessee Valley Authority, United States of America v. Outstanding Mineral Rights in 2,892.6 Acres of Land, Etc., St. Genevieve Gas Company, Inc.

747 F.2d 1411, 40 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 732, 1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 16185
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
DecidedDecember 5, 1984
Docket83-7498
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 747 F.2d 1411 (St. Genevieve Gas Company, Inc., a Corporation v. Tennessee Valley Authority, United States of America v. Outstanding Mineral Rights in 2,892.6 Acres of Land, Etc., St. Genevieve Gas Company, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
St. Genevieve Gas Company, Inc., a Corporation v. Tennessee Valley Authority, United States of America v. Outstanding Mineral Rights in 2,892.6 Acres of Land, Etc., St. Genevieve Gas Company, Inc., 747 F.2d 1411, 40 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 732, 1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 16185 (11th Cir. 1984).

Opinion

747 F.2d 1411

40 Fed.R.Serv.2d 732

ST. GENEVIEVE GAS COMPANY, INC., a corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY, et al., Defendants-Appellees.
UNITED STATES of America, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
OUTSTANDING MINERAL RIGHTS IN 2,892.6 ACRES OF LAND, etc.,
et al., Defendants,
St. Genevieve Gas Company, Inc., et al., Defendants-Appellants.

No. 83-7498.

United States Court of Appeals,
Eleventh Circuit.

Dec. 5, 1984.

Robert S. Edington, Mobile, Ala., Gene M. Hamby, Jr., Sheffield, Ala., for St. Genevieve Gas Co. and U.S. Pipe.

M. Elizabeth Culbreth, James E. Fox, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Brent R. Marquand, Don O. Whitehead, Attys., T.V.A., Knoxville, Tenn., for appellees.

Herbert S. Sanger, Jr., Gen. Counsel, James E. Fox, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Brent R. Marquand, Don O. Whitehead, M. Elizabeth Culbreth, Attys., Tennessee Valley Authority, Knoxville, Tenn., for appellees U.S.A. ex rel. T.V.A. and T.V.A.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama.

Before RONEY and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges, and MORGAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

R. LANIER ANDERSON, III, Circuit Judge:

This appeal involves two cases consolidated by the district court, one an inverse condemnation suit by appellant St. Genevieve Gas Company ("St. Genevieve"), and the other a condemnation suit by appellee Tennessee Valley Authority ("TVA"). For the reasons discussed below, we affirm the district court's finding that the leases held by St. Genevieve had no commercial value. However, we remand to the district court for an award of nominal damages, resulting from the TVA's undisputed taking of the St. Genevieve mineral leases.

FACTS AND BACKGROUND

At some point prior to 1979, the TVA decided to construct the Cedar Creek Dam and Reservoir in the northern portion of Franklin County, Alabama. In constructing the dam, the TVA found it necessary to flood certain lands in which St. Genevieve had leasehold mineral rights. In early 1979, St. Genevieve, anticipating the imminent flooding of the land in question, filed suit in federal district court. It sought to enjoin TVA from "impounding"1 the area where St. Genevieve held its mineral leases. The TVA flooded the area in question on the day following St. Genevieve's request for an injunction.

In its complaint, St. Genevieve also requested that the TVA buy its mineral rights or condemn its property. The district court denied St. Genevieve's motion for a temporary or permanent injunction, stating that injunctive relief was not proper; however, it held that St. Genevieve had stated a claim for just compensation. Approximately six months after the effective seizure of St. Genevieve's leases, TVA instituted a condemnation proceeding pursuant to Secs. 4(h) and 25 of the TVA Act, 16 U.S.C.A. Secs. 831c(h), 831x (West 1974).

After consolidating the two actions, the district court referred the cases to a three-person standing commission appointed by the district court to determine the issue of just compensation pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 71A(h). The commission held an eight-day hearing in November of 1982. The hearing involved extensive testimony from many witnesses on both sides and the introduction of numerous exhibits. In addition, the commission viewed the subject properties. On March 21, 1983, the commission issued a unanimous 65-page report. The commission rejected St. Genevieve's contention that there was natural gas and limestone present in commercially exploitable amounts. Applying the relevant legal standard, see Eagle Lake Improvement Co. v. United States, 141 F.2d 562 (5th Cir.1944),2 the commission held that there was neither a "reasonable probability" nor a "reasonable possibility" of commercial exploitation of natural gas or limestone. The commission thus found that just compensation for the taking of St. Genevieve's mineral leases was zero dollars.

In an opinion dated July 7, 1983, the district court adopted the commission's report without exception. It agreed with the commission's reading of Eagle Lake, supra, and deferred to the commission's findings of fact pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 53(e)(2) ("The court shall accept the [commission's] findings of fact unless clearly erroneous").3

DISCUSSION

The primary dispute in this case is factual.4 We will only set aside the district court's findings of fact with regard to the value of St. Genevieve's leases if such findings are "clearly erroneous." Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a).

St. Genevieve claims that the subsurface lands under lease to it contained commercially exploitable deposits of natural gas and limestone at the time of the taking. Thus, the leases have a market value which can be ascertained by reference to "comparable" sales of mineral leases in northern Alabama. TVA, on the other hand, urges that the commission's finding of no market value be affirmed. TVA relies on its expert witnesses who testified, based on their prior knowledge and subsurface testing of the subject lease properties, that limestone and natural gas do not exist in commercially exploitable amounts. TVA also points to prior exploration of the properties which produced no commercially significant finds of mineral deposits.

A review of the entire record reveals a dispute as to the potential for commercial production. Some of St. Genevieve's witnesses did testify that commercial exploitation was possible at the time of the taking. However, we do not sit to reevaluate the evidence and make new findings of fact.

A finding is clearly erroneous "when although there is evidence to support it, the reviewing court on the entire [evidence] is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed."

Jackson v. Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Co., 678 F.2d 992, 1016 (11th Cir.1982), quoting United States v. United States Gypsum Co., 333 U.S. 364, 395, 68 S.Ct. 525, 542, 92 L.Ed. 746 (1948).

TVA presented numerous expert witnesses who were thoroughly apprised of the factual issues. They unanimously stated their belief that St. Genevieve's leases were worthless. The commission's view, therefore, that "the great weight of the testimony ... leads to a finding ... that there are no commercial quantities of natural gas in the properties described" is supported by the record.5

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
747 F.2d 1411, 40 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 732, 1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 16185, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/st-genevieve-gas-company-inc-a-corporation-v-tennessee-valley-ca11-1984.